Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon fires two UX designers critical of warehouse working conditions

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 399 posts

Re: Amazon fires two UX designers critical of warehouse working conditions

#151

Post by missedthecue »

YokoZar wrote: post #123
alehul wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon is firing them for commenting publicly on its business. If you were employed by a company and disparaged them publicly, breaking company policy, would you believe that your employment with them is in any way protected?

Such policies are facially illegal under the National Labor Relations Act, which guarantees workers the right to engaged in protected concerted activity, such as discussing their working conditions with eachother, the press, and the public. The tweets that got these two fired were explicitly about working conditions. Google had a similar policy and, after losing NLRA cases, had to issue a notice to all employees sayi…

They weren't discussing their working conditions.

Re: Amazon fires two UX designers critical of warehouse working conditions

#152

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0 »

skywhopper wrote: post #122
A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't honestly say I disagree with you. There must be a line between you and work and a question where that line is is a valid question. As an employer, do you want to have an employee that in a very public manner ( and these days it is oh so easy to be public ) trashes your business? Is that line crossed? I would argue, as usual, that it depends. If the employee's life is threatened by horrific business practices,…

A company as big as Amazon is very different than a small firm with a few employees. There's also a big difference between criticizing the company's products and criticizing their business practices. Where "the line" is depends on the specific circumstances, but it's pretty clear to me that Amazon overdid it in this case. If they found these employees' statements embarrassing enough to fire them, then it sounds like…

"A company as big as Amazon is very different than a small firm with a few employees. "

We are in absolute agreement. Frankly, I have argued before that they are already too big.

"There's also a big difference between criticizing the company's products and criticizing their business practices."

I am not sure I agree with that statement. Would you feel the same if the employee publicly criticized a company for using non recycled paper AND they have to change course now and use recycled paper; afterwards the story "went viral" and employee got fired for that specific action. Is employee justified in doing that without any repercussions? It is genuinely hard for me to argue for the employee here.

"Where "the line" is depends on the specific circumstances, but it's pretty clear to me that Amazon overdid it in this case."

To you it may be clear, but clearly not to everyone since we are having this discussion. Whether the pendulum should swing ( it should ) is a worthwhile conversation to have.

"If they found these employees' statements embarrassing enough to fire them, then it sounds like they know they are doing something wrong."

I don't know if I buy this argument. HR does not like troublemakers seems like more plausible explanation.

Re: Amazon fires two UX designers critical of warehouse working conditions

#154

Post by WalterBright »

rkachowski wrote: post #132
PopeDotNinja wrote: post #26

In general, trash talking one's employer in public is usually inversely proportional to the longevity of one's employment with said employer.

do you think they deserved it? or are you trying to point out some axiom of employment that exists objectively and independent of exploitative working conditions?

Few people want to associate with others who trash talk them.

Re: Amazon fires two UX designers critical of warehouse working conditions

#155

Post by driverdan »

rw2 wrote: post #127

The UX designers never worked in a warehouse, they had no first hand experience. I would find the complaint more valuable from an actual Amazon warehouse workers. The UX designer probably work in a cushy Amazon corporate office with free snacks and drinks, but amazon warehouse roles are probably under more spartan and strict conditions. How does Amazon warehouse work conditions compare to other warehouse work conditi…

> But for cost reasons they can't extend the same benefits for people who sort packages the same as people who write code or design screens.

That's not why. Salaries are largely driven by supply and demand. If there are enough people willing to be employed at a low pay level there's no incentive to increase it.

Re: Amazon fires two UX designers critical of warehouse working conditions

#156

Post by cirno »

> “We support every employee’s right to criticize their employer’s working conditions,” a spokesperson said, “but that does not come with blanket immunity against any and all internal policies.”

What a strange statement. "We support their right to criticize their working conditions, only actually we don't at all"

Re: Amazon fires two UX designers critical of warehouse working conditions

#157

Post by alehul »

YokoZar wrote: post #123
alehul wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon is firing them for commenting publicly on its business. If you were employed by a company and disparaged them publicly, breaking company policy, would you believe that your employment with them is in any way protected?

Such policies are facially illegal under the National Labor Relations Act, which guarantees workers the right to engaged in protected concerted activity, such as discussing their working conditions with eachother, the press, and the public. The tweets that got these two fired were explicitly about working conditions. Google had a similar policy and, after losing NLRA cases, had to issue a notice to all employees sayi…

IANAL, but all I know of the National Labor Relations Act pertains to unions and collective bargaining. These were UX designers, far detached from warehouses, speaking on warehouse conditions.

While warehouse workers could file suit under the National Labor Relations Act if fired for speaking publicly of their own working conditions, I'm not sure that Amazon's UX team would qualify (but again, IANAL).

To draw an analogy: Would a DoorDash engineer be safe speaking out against the working conditions of DoorDash drivers?

Re: Amazon fires two UX designers critical of warehouse working conditions

#158

Post by JSavageOne »

The U.S. was founded on the principle of freedom of speech, yet if you are an employee you don't have freedom of speech.

This is disturbing, and the only solution is for the government to step in and make it illegal to fire someone without just cause.

I believe in many European countries employers aren't allowed to fire their employees unless there is proof of underperformance. It seems that we need to adopt something similar. It's already illegal to discriminate against someone based on their race, I don't see the problem with making it illegal to fire someone over their opinions on working conditions and politics. Corporations should not be running the country.

Re: Amazon fires two UX designers critical of warehouse working conditions

#159

Post by SaxonRobber »

jshevek wrote: post #109
mcherm wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's pretty easy to come up with a lot of absurd and "legal" at-will policies (e.g. we'll fire anybody who watches porn) My favorite which would work in much of the US is "We'll fire anybody who registers with the Republican party." (Or Democratic, if you prefer.) Especially in a state where registration is required in order to participate in the primary. It is legal, but, I believe, completely unacceptable to just…

> It is legal, but, I believe, completely unacceptable to just about everyone. This is not true in my experience. Many people on the left, particularly under 35, earnestly believe that their political opponents are by definition racist and evil. In a manner similar to how I would not want a literal neo-nazi on my company's payroll, they do not want a registered Republican on the company's payroll. Edit: In other word…

It is my experience that everyone who self identifies as a republican or democrat is brainwashed at this point. The worst offenders are those who are so delusional that they mock anyone who avoids political discourse or abstains from voting. They are so high on political fumes that they can’t imagine that there are things more important than our cancerous political process.

Re: Amazon fires two UX designers critical of warehouse working conditions

#160

Post by hypersoar »

IANAL, but this sure looks like illegal (and immoral) retaliation to me. At-will employment isn't a magic spell. "Because company policy" is not a good enough reason to fire someone if that company policy violates the law.

From the NLRB's page defining protected concerted action[1] (emphasis mine):

"A single employee may also engage in protected concerted activity if he or she is...trying to induce group action, or seeking to prepare for group action. However, you can lose protection by saying or doing something egregiously offensive or knowingly and maliciously false, or by publicly disparaging your employer's products or services without relating your complaints to any labor controversy."

So, let's say an Amazon employee were to simply tweet "Amazon is shit. Don't buy from them." and got fired for it. Then they couldn't defend themselves by coming back and saying "Well, actually, I was talking about working conditions for Amazon's warehouse employees." Fair enough.

With that in mind, here's what allegedly got them fired:

Emily Cunningham tweeted a thread[2] that begins:

"I'm matching donations up to $500 to support my Amazon warehouse worker colleagues. "The lack of safe and sanitary working conditions" puts them and the public at risk.

It's bad ya'll...".

The thread then goes into detail on that point. It could not be more clearly about working conditions.

Maren Costa tweeted[3]:

"I am matching donations to $500 to support my Amazon warehouse colleagues and their communities, while they struggle to get consistent, sufficient protections and procedures from our employer. DM or comment for match. https://chuffed.org/project/help-amazon-warehouse-workers-ex... # via @Chuffed"

...and that's it. Again, it's very clearly about working conditions.

Amazon doesn't get to make a policy against employees criticizing the way they treat their workers. That's how protections for labor organization work.

[1] https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/rights-we-protect/the-law/em...

[2] https://twitter.com/emahlee/status/1243441985173651456

[3] https://twitter.com/marencosta/status/1243585580736237568

Post reply on HN